Bibliographic record
Abstract
Khānqahī system has always facilitated the suffering humanity in terms of not only providing them with the resources to meet the basic necessities of life but also showing them the right path to lead their life according to the teachings of Sharī̒ah and Tarīqah. This research article is a comparative study between the management of "Khānqāhs" presently administered by the Department of Auqaāf and those under the supervision of the successors (Sajjāda Nasheens) of Sufis and their outcomes for the character building of their followers. The research has adopted mixed research method to pinpoint the significant difference in the management of these Khanqahs and their resultant outcomes for the welfare of the general visitors. The data has been collected through questionnaires for visitors and the managers of these Khānqāhs both from public sector and the successors (Sajjāda Nasheens) of Sufis. There has been found significant difference between the opinion of the visitors of Khanqahs under the supervision of the government and those which are supervised by the successors (Sajjāda Nasheens). To conclude, this finding provides a strong common ground for a collective effort to revive Khānqāhī system to upgrade the moral values of people of the contemporary society by revamping character-building programs according to the present-day needs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.978 | 0.976 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".